94 replies to this topic

[bad arcade kitty]

XX Sulla XX, on 08 September 2015 - 02:19 AM, said:

The pre-dreadnought had an assortment of battery sizes. But in 1906 the HMS Dreadnought came along and changed the game.

"Dreadnought was the first battleship of her era to have a uniform main battery, rather than having a few large guns complemented by a heavy secondary battery of smaller guns.

wait, so 2 lpl (few large guns) and 4 ml (a heavy secondary battery of smaller guns) or 1 gauss (few large guns) and 4-6 ml (a heavy secondary battery of smaller guns) are pre-dreadnought

[Spleenslitta]

XX Sulla XX, on 08 September 2015 - 12:39 PM, said:

You know these kinds or arguments do not prove mixed builds are good. They prove mixed builds can work some times against some players in some tiers.

Only effective against some tiers? I don't care if i'm the lousiest player in MWO as long as i'm having fun.
Oneclick builds are boring to me....plain and simple

That guy i thought about M.R.M.A. got better than when he was regular average Joe using meta builds and tactics.
That is not a falsehood no matter how you twist and turn it.
Being top tier is not what drives MWO around....

What gives PGI money to keep the servers up is the majority of players. And the majority of players are not in the top tier.
They are in the mid tiers. Those tiers are what matters the most. You can cry and brag all you want about being in a top merc corp or whatever you want.
PGI said MWO is a thinking players game. If you think using a single mousebutton is all you can handle that's your limit.
I prefer to challenge myself more when i play.

[Spleenslitta]

Jman5, on 08 September 2015 - 12:59 PM, said:

Actually, I completely agree with you there. However you need to take it a step further and consider whether your short range tonnage would be better served put into more long range guns, or vice versa.

Let's say you typically spend 90% of the match in ER Large laser territory. It would make sense to specialize toward long range. If you spend 90% of your match in small laser territory, it makes sense to specialize in short range. Otherwise you spend most of the match with a good chunk of your weaponry doing nothing for you.

If you really want to get to the bottom of things, go to the weapon stat page on the forum and write down the total damage of the weapons you're using. Then play a dozen matches and refresh the page. Then you can figure out how much damage/ton you're getting out of each weapon.

I allready looked into it. I spend most my time in 400-600 meter range. So i got a CERML to help me at those ranges.
Even though it's optimal range is 405 meters it still does damage and can crit. But it's decent to use it at short ranges too in addition to my short range weapons.
Recently got an Streak SRM6 to help me out a bit against lights. My builds are constantly shifting.

[Red Shrike]

Spleenslitta, on 08 September 2015 - 11:16 AM, said:

4) But here is what really counts as far as damage goes. Across 724 matches my KFX-C variant has an average damage of 325.96 damage per match.
That's not my top or bottom damage. That's my damage total in my KFX-C split across 724 matches.

If a Kitfox can do more average damage than my Atlas, I must be doing something wrong.

[Aggravated Assault Mech]

You know the conclusion of this line of thought is that the only person that wins is the one that just launches airstrikes from orbit, right?

[XX Sulla XX]

Spleenslitta, on 08 September 2015 - 01:45 PM, said:

Only effective against some tiers? I don't care if i'm the lousiest player in MWO as long as i'm having fun.
Oneclick builds are boring to me....plain and simple

That guy i thought about M.R.M.A. got better than when he was regular average Joe using meta builds and tactics.
That is not a falsehood no matter how you twist and turn it.
Being top tier is not what drives MWO around....

What gives PGI money to keep the servers up is the majority of players. And the majority of players are not in the top tier.
They are in the mid tiers. Those tiers are what matters the most. You can cry and brag all you want about being in a top merc corp or whatever you want.
PGI said MWO is a thinking players game. If you think using a single mousebutton is all you can handle that's your limit.
I prefer to challenge myself more when i play.

Again never said you cant play mixed builds. Its the argument that they work better that I do not agree with.

[bad arcade kitty]

if you read my previous post... you are wrong
mixed builds work wonders, gauss vomit is frigging meta, almost all ballistic builds have laser backups, c-lpls are supported with c-mls etc

it's just builds should be the mixes of weapons which complement each other in the reality of mwo
lore builds might be built with weapons which complement each other in the reality of tt, i dunno

Edited by bad arcade kitty, 08 September 2015 - 02:57 PM.

[1453 R]

vnlk65n, on 08 September 2015 - 02:40 PM, said:

You know the conclusion of this line of thought is that the only person that wins is the one that just launches airstrikes from orbit, right?

The conclusion of this line of thought is stop expecting awful slop-buckets to be good.

Shocking revelation - these builds weren't good even in the original tabletop game. They suffered from the same problem in TT they do in MWO - they have no idea what they want to be doing, where they should be fighting, or what their job is. if your armament and equipment is a fragmented mess where nothing you have works with anything elsr you have, guess what? You're going to lose against 'Mechs with a cohesive identity run by pilots who know what that 'Mech's job is.

One-of-everything builds suck. They suck in MWO, they suck in TT. Nothing in the game will ever make them not suck. Notice that in TT, most of the really iconic, enduring, long-standing machines HAVE A JOB. They know what their range is, they know what they're supposed to be doing, and they do it.

You can use more than one weapon to accomplish your job. You can rarely accomplish your job with seven distinctly different, generally incompatible weapon types.

[XX Sulla XX]

bad arcade kitty, on 08 September 2015 - 02:56 PM, said:

if you read my previous post... you are wrong
mixed builds work wonders, gauss vomit is frigging meta, almost all ballistic builds have laser backups, c-lpls are supported with c-mls etc

it's just builds should be the mixes of weapons which complement each other in the reality of mwo
lore builds might be built with weapons which complement each other in the reality of tt, i dunno

You some how missed the ENTIRE point haha. So let me make it simpler I even used the examples of the mechs loadouts you mentioned to show what I ment. But lets try it again.

Option 1. (I do not like this one. This is the type I am saying does not work as well. So this is BAD.) Mixed loadouts that do not complement each other. Example mixing a flamer, lrm 5, AC5, 2 medium lasers and a 1 streak on the same mech. --- This is what I am talking about.

Option 2. (I am saying this kind does work well. This is GOOD.) Complementary loadouts. That is loadouts that work over the same rough ranges etc. The ones that make best use of tonnage. For example Gauss Vomit. Laser vomit etc.

And I am just talking about over all being effective as you move up in PSR. If you want to run builds from the books or builds for fun of course that is OK. I am just talking against the argument that builds of random weopons are as good as meta builds.

1453 R, on 08 September 2015 - 02:57 PM, said:

The conclusion of this line of thought is stop expecting awful slop-buckets to be good.

Shocking revelation - these builds weren't good even in the original tabletop game. They suffered from the same problem in TT they do in MWO - they have no idea what they want to be doing, where they should be fighting, or what their job is. if your armament and equipment is a fragmented mess where nothing you have works with anything elsr you have, guess what? You're going to lose against 'Mechs with a cohesive identity run by pilots who know what that 'Mech's job is.

One-of-everything builds suck. They suck in MWO, they suck in TT. Nothing in the game will ever make them not suck. Notice that in TT, most of the really iconic, enduring, long-standing machines HAVE A JOB. They know what their range is, they know what they're supposed to be doing, and they do it.

You can use more than one weapon to accomplish your job. You can rarely accomplish your job with seven distinctly different, generally incompatible weapon types.

Exactly Right

Edited by XX Sulla XX, 08 September 2015 - 03:28 PM.

[Aggravated Assault Mech]

1453 R, on 08 September 2015 - 02:57 PM, said:

bad builds are bad

Thanks for your insight.

I was actually just pointing out that even if what OP is saying is true, the analogy itself is a false one on multiple levels.

[Dinochrome]

Hailz Mechwarriors;

In the world of advanced armored mechs/ tanks what this thread is comparing is a Bolo MK 32 to MWO battlemechs, not even close to the same. Apples and oranges. Fire up your internet, look it up, you will see what I am talking about

V/R Dinochrome

[Burktross]

I go by the rule that if you have more than 4 different weapon groups with different guns you're doing it wrong.

[N0MAD]

You know the secondary 5 inch battery was considered as important on Dreadnoughts and post dreadnought BBs as the main battery?. Why? because it was the defense against what was considered the biggest threat to these giant machines at the time, the Torpedo boat (later called destroyers)

[Kilo 40]

XX Sulla XX, on 08 September 2015 - 12:19 PM, said:

Yes so in other words just like mechwarrior they have one role to do well. But people insist on trying to run mixed load outs that do not do the one role well.

no. in other words, you are completely wrong but are unable to admit it.

[XX Sulla XX]

Kilo 40, on 08 September 2015 - 04:48 PM, said:

no. in other words, you are completely wrong but are unable to admit it.

I would be happy to admit it if I was

[Kilo 40]

XX Sulla XX, on 08 September 2015 - 04:53 PM, said:

I would be happy to admit it if I was

no you wouldn't. you never do.

[XX Sulla XX]

Kilo 40, on 08 September 2015 - 04:57 PM, said:

no you wouldn't. you never do.

What I have been wrong about a lot of things. Like not getting a good paying job with good
benefits when I was 18 and then retiring at 38 for example.

[Spleenslitta]

XX Sulla XX, on 08 September 2015 - 02:52 PM, said:

Again never said you cant play mixed builds. Its the argument that they work better that I do not agree with.

Pardon me but i never said mixed builds work better than boats. Stop putting words into other peoples mouths.
Boats have their place just like mixed builds do. Here is a simple example of how a mixed build has an advantage over boats but not superior.

Let's say i'm facing my nemesis the Firestarter with 8 SPL at close range in one of my weirdo builds.
At such a range i'm clearly at a disadvantage, but if i make use of the damage he has received from fighting others i might win or at least damage him badly.
All those short and middle range backup weapons makes gives me an opportunity to strike back repeatedly. If i can spare the heat i can even use my long range weapon.
Or i can sacrifice my long range weapon side to gain one last strike with my backup weapons.

But if i was in a KFX with 2x ER LL i would probably not do so well because firing those weapons demands a lot of heat.
I got no low heat alternatives and thus i'm unlikely to be able to fire my weapons more than 2 times before i'm so hot that i'm near shutdown.

It's that simple.

A mix build can adapt to any situation and do better at close ranges than a long range boat.
Needless to say a mix build does better than a short range boat build filled with weapons that become ineffective at 200 meters.
But mixed builds are not superior than a boat at their prefered range.
I think my use of a middle range weapon to boost my long range weapon makes me able to strike back at a boat with respectable firepower whenever that middle range weapon is within range.

I hope you understand that you don't just come along and put words into my mouth like that XX Sulla XX.

Timberwolf581, on 08 September 2015 - 01:58 PM, said:

If a Kitfox can do more average damage than my Atlas, I must be doing something wrong.

I think like this..... All mechs sizes are capable of doing damage but they have different ways of doing it.
I shoot while trying not to get shot in return. I tend survive longer because i don't trade hits with my enemies.
The longer i live the more damage i do. Of course things can go horribly wrong in all kinds of ways.

An Atlas however is not exactly the able to dodge very well no matter how good you are.
But i've seen a lot of assault mechs just stand there taking another shot at his victim after delivering a surprising first blow.
That second shot often comes at the price of a return shot from the victim.

Imagine if you went into cover after shooting your enemy once without him being able to retaliate.
You relocate and he stands there looking at the place you dissappeared waiting for you appear once more.
He is standing there mostly useless while you have moved onwards. That would be your win no matter how i look at it.

You would be doing 50% or thereabouts less damage per shooting location but might get far less damage in return. Thus you can fight longer just like me.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

FlipOver, on 08 September 2015 - 02:26 AM, said:

Like myself you will see replies from others with "sub-par" builds showing how good those builds can be.

I got 771 on a mauler 80 with no skills yet lol

[Telmasa]

XX Sulla XX, on 08 September 2015 - 03:08 AM, said:

So you really think balance changes are going to make min max meta type builds not a thing?

Kerensky willing, balance changes will result in a variety of min/max builds that all serve different purposes - not just a couple builds that beat everything else.